Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:05, 27 October 2011

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Welcome, correspondents If you're here because I deleted an article you think should be undeleted, please read this first and remember--Most of the time, I didn't write the text that appears in the deletion summary.
N.B. I don't respond well to either fawning or abuse. Talk to me like a peer, assume good faith, and you'll find I reciprocate in my helpfulness.

Functionary Assistance My ability to help as a checkuser, oversighter, or arbitrator in individual matters is currently limited by my positional and non-Misplaced Pages obligations. For non-trivial assistance, especially that which requires extensive consideration of private correspondence, you will likely get a faster response by asking another functionary.

Position Essays may help you understand my point of view with regard to...

• Notability of Fictional Topics
• Articles for Deletion
• Blocks
• My RfA Standards

Administrator Goals Doing my best to improve the tiny little wedge in the top center:

Gh87's TV prods

I've restored the histories and talk pages of all his prods related to The O.C. season 4. I was at first reluctant to do this because I tend to agree with you when in comes to TV episodes of otherwise notable shows but this is PROD and articles deleted by PROD are suppose to be restored upon request. As a matter of fact, in most cases I don't see a problem with an admin restoring a PRODed article himself if he wishes to contest it. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that. I don't see a problem either with doing it myself--PROD is easy go, easy come back--except that I am super swamped with ARBCOM work right now. Jclemens (talk) 02:23, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand your reasoning here...

In your vote on WMC's request here, it would be helpful if you could clarify your reasoning. It looks like you're punishing WMC because you dislike the behaviour of other parties to the case (and other individuals who have commented on his request, or who are involved in the topic area); I hope that that wasn't your intent, but it is difficult to read your "group of people" and "public tug-of-war" comments any other way.

You also wrote about "lifting sanctions" (actually, just a reduction) sending "a particularly bad message". Can you elaborate on what you mean by that? WMC was sanctioned by the ArbCom. After he has spent nearly a year without causing trouble, and continued to contribute extensively and positively to the project, he has asked for another chance to edit in an area where he has personal expertise, with the awareness that his conduct will be closely monitored. This is not an instance where a troublemaker has been subject to multiple topic bans and returned to disrupt the project after the expiry of each. Is "the ArbCom admits that it is possible for editors to reform their behaviour" really such a terrible message? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

*ping* I'm not sure if you saw that I had left this message; I'm still hoping you'll take the time to clarify, elaborate on, or revise your comment. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:18, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hi J, I have a question. I and other participants in the TM arbcom have sandboxes with auxiliary evidence, that are/were linked to the evidence page for that case. What is the policy for such pages? If there is no clear policy, than is there a place I can post the question for the Committee to consider? many thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

WT:ARBCOM is probably a better place to ask. I haven't dealt with historical remnants like that before. I suppose they can probably be blanked, or deleted U1, since the decision shouldn't be linking to auxiliary pages--diffs should be to the mainspace edits in contention. Jclemens (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Buffyverse

I found it a little troubling that you scolded RAP for his incivility, but let the comments by others pass, especially given that Moni3 at one point went so far as to say "fuck civility". I've been trying to keep the conversation on-point and the tone moderate, but frankly as far as I'm concerned at least three of the contributors there have behaved somewhat inappropriately; I don't think it's prudent to scold one while letting the others' comments pass. Doniago (talk) 12:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Really?

I'm surprised you only put Rusted AutoParts on notice here. Moni's behavior is terrible, why have you ignored it? I left her a warning.--v/r - TP 13:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is AdminHelp - Is this thing on?. Thank you. ROBERTMFROMLI | /_CN 21:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)